Show THE CHURCH CASES according to prior arrangement the three cases cabie known by the title of the united states vs va certain real estate belonging to the late corporation of the church of jesus christ of latter day saints came on for hearing today the question involved Is whether the following properties should be es cheated the tithing house gardo house church farm and historians historian office district attorney varlan varian represented the gov rement and asked leave of the court to have the name of judge J A Mars marshall bull entered on the record as associate counsel for the plaintiff haintl W and also that of attorney JS Nw rawlins lins who he said had been appointed by the attorney general as epenial cial counsel for the government of ta the united states the defendants were represented by attorney dickson Dick aon hon F 8 richards and attorney le grande young mr richards in the outset asked permission to file a petition of intervention in each of the cases from the first one read we extract the following now conae come james P freeze and spencer clawson and file this petition in intervention on behalf of themselves and all others who are members of the church of jesus christ of latter day saints and for their grounds of intervention allege that the members of said church ardmore are more aban two hundred thousand in number and so numerous that they cannot without inconvenience and oppressive delays in ill the said action be brought before the coul court rt that ali all of said parties have buve arl an interest in common with said innerve ors ora in the subject of this petition and the questions involved to in this action wherefore inter venora file this petition petit iop for the benefit of all its members that sheea intervenors and the members of said church are equitably the owners of the property hereinafter described bed and that the legal title is now held hedd by the defendants defend anto william B preston robert T burton and john B R winder as trustees for the voluntary religious association known as the church of jesus christ of latter day saints in trust ifor for religious and charl able durpos purposed pur pos that the said church is and has been ever since the 3rd ard day of march 1887 a voluntary association for religious and and purposes purpose and has the and hold such through trustees trustee to be used for such purpose seta that the said aid defendants were to in possession of said property sit at the th time etione it was seized by the united states marshal pursuant to the information proceedings had bad bere herein iri said property being a part of what Is ia known as the tithing office and grounds gr that at the time of the enactment of the law of congress co ogress of july 1862 and long prior thereto the said a I 1 d ch church as a 11 religious association held cotses sed aed and occupied the above described real estate and had a vested right to and interest in the sano same and it ever since has had and still has such vested right to and interest in said property after reciting the facts upon which such vested right and the defendants claim to said property are founded the petition bayl some time in the year 1856 the church took possession of the south gouth half of lots iota five ana six block eighty eight plat A of salt lake city survey and placed valuable improvements thereon and have continued to occupy the same with said improvements down to the present time said lots were a portion of the townsite entry made by the mayor of salt lake city as aa aforesaid pursuant to the said act of congress of march 2 1887 the said laid church by its trustee brigham Young duly filed chalmin claim in the probate court of salt lake county utah territory under the townsite act of the legislative assembly of utah approved february 17 1869 for the sou south th half of said lots live five and six and the said court duly adjudicated all such premises to brigham young who was then trustee in trust for the church and took and held the same under such deed for its benefit at the time the act of congress of march 3rd ard 1887 took effect the legal title was held by robert T burton in trust and for the use and benefit of the said church and on the 2nd and day of july 1887 said robert F r burton coti con ve ed the same to william B preston john B R winder and himself as trustees intervenors allege that no part of the property was ever acquired or held in violation of the provisions of any law of the united states but all of it was acquired for the religious and charitable chari uses of the church and the purchase price thereof and the cost of the improvements were paid from voluntary contributions made to the church from time to time by the members thereof to be held managed and applied by the church through its officers and trustees chosen and elected by the members to religious and charitable uses and purposes jn which the church and its members were interested that the property and the whole thereof was at all times prior to the time when it was seized and taken POEM possession NIOn of by said receiver held used and applied by the Church through its officers and trustees to such religious and charitable uses and purposes and not otherwise and at no time was the same or any part thereof used or applied to establish maintain aida aid support or eu encourage courage the practice of polygamy or plural marriage or to any other unlawful rul use or purpose and that said property was not worth more than ten thousand dollars on the lot day of july 1862 the intervenors inter lenors faither say that the plaintiffs ought not to be permitted to prosecute this action because all proceedings ce to forfeit or escheat such property or any part thereof are barred by section 1047 of the revised statutes of the united states and the action did not nor did the alleged cause of forfeiture mentioned in the complaint accrue within five years before the commencement nent of these proceedings or the filing of said complaint or within five years prior to said die dis soju tion of said corporation plaintiffs have the right to forfeit or escheat the property for the re reason on ohp that t the church corporation by its officers and agents were in th the e possession and occupancy of all the premises and property prior to and since the first day of july 1862 the date of the passage of act of congress entitled an act to punish and prevent the practice of polygamy in the territories of the united states and other places and disapproving and annulling certain acts of the legislative assembly of the territory of utah approved july let 1862 peti titio ners pray that it be decreed that the property belongs to the church of jesus christ of Latter day dav saints and that the members thereof be authorized to appod appoint ut a trustee or trustees to hold manage and apply the property to the purposes for which it was originally nally given give givenans nand and that the united states marshal deliver the possession of said property to gether with its proceeds and income in his hands to said trustee or trustees as may be named and appointed at a gell general conference of the members of the church mr richards said the other two petitions were substantially the same as the foregoing except so far as related to the acquisition and use of the respective spec tive properties mr varian objected to the filing of the petitions these actions jae he said were all brought originally in the form of a general information filed against the property described by the astorr ey general the practice assumed ty by the officers of the government had been affirmed by this court previously and twice decided that information was a general one and gave notice to all persons claiming any interest in the special parcels of real realty to attend before this court on a day apeci specified fled then and there to set up claims they might have to the title the pop possession session was already in the supreme court through its receiver these were actions at law having for their object the forfeiture or es cheating of the title or fee to the united states to be devoted to certain purposes the sole ground of action by the united states was as alleged that the property was acquin ed and held in violation of the law of 1862 which prohibits religious corporations or associations from acquiring or holding realty in the territories of the united states in excess of value that was the issue presented on behalf of the united states the defendants joined issue upon that and in addition pleaded the statue of limitations batio tat ions s the holders of the legal title were before the court counsel on the other side aide seemed to have proceeded on a question of equity for what purpose was leave now asked to intervene to accomplish something that could not be accomplished as the matter now stood was not the church itself represented by those persons who held the legal title as trustees for the church it was sought by these petitions to do something apat that this court could not do they sought to have an order made by this court as aa to the determination of this property to take it out of the hands of the supreme court of this territory ard devote it to trust purposes entirely for eign to these actie actions ns he contended that these persons persona had no standing or right to lo intervene and even if they had ha d any interest they were foreclosed and nd pree precluded eluded from coming in now IS they were in default for HL two years past the court f nd not sit in these proceedings to allow individuals making claims to this property arty to come in up to the very hour i bf roge the ce trial and judge judgment ent the prop ety was seized notice was given of the day fixed for the hearin beariD gand those who fao had any claim originally came in ami had prepared to go to trial no In individual dividu al member of the church I 1 could appear in court and litigate this question F I 1 mr dickson submitted that any per f interested in this property had a to intervene and be heard no body was foreclosed or barred and nobody was in default at all the pro feedings ee oe edings already had and referred to by mr varian occurred before that gentleman came into the office of district attorney and the record W r showed that proceedings had not been i hild in this case such as were necessity ry requiring anybody to appear counsel ansel reviewed the past history of T t these ose ca cases ses and contended that any directly interested person who chose to the scene now was entitled upon r come to be heard mr rawlins supplemented the argul ment of 0 mr varian f the matter was further discussed and ta zane said he was inclined to judge i think that the point should be reached 11 without the interposition of further bartles Vart les he did nut see the necessity kw the present intervention and there denied the application M mr dickson 1 I suppose it can ue be led judge zane oh yes so that you take e any ny exceptions exception you have a it b ht to this r varian then sailed in and out ened ed what counsel on the govera delit e side ilde proposed to do having lead from the complaint in the cases 0 the court he said they now pro r lobed to offer the records of the suit in mil Sa ancery cery brought in the supreme of the territory to wind up the re 0 f this church corporation dis die alved d b by y th the e act t of 1887 also the fact ib eed d statement t bement of facts in accordance with ith the decree and findings of the omert and other do documents cumento which he enumerated rs J B R walker and H W ae ere called by mr varian tb tee testify tiby as to the value of the temple block ak from 1867 to 1872 both stated hit it w was of greater value than 00 0 at that time me this closed the x te tor for the government A petition for intervention was then 2 doted and read by mr dickson sid alfter after objections on the other side ald abort argame arguments ants from both filex parties antte floe ih 4 dourt court permitted it to be filed bishop john B R winder was called 14 A witness by the defense in reply uon on F 8 richards he said he came its it lake city in 1863 1853 and had re ad 1 here ever since he had been aged ed in various kinds of bu business acquainted with the tithing office fretty erty temple block and the st office mr richards asked witness to state abe value plue of each of these pieces of arty rt in Iia 1862 but mr varian ob to the question as irre irrelevant vaut the court ruled that it might be answered and the witness said it was waa a difficult matter to fix the value of real estate in this city thirty years ago at that time it had no fixed value and very little changed hands bands on being requested to answer the question he valued the tithing office property oro perty at the temple block at and the historians historian office not to exceed 1000 answering mr richards question he said that the three pieces named did not exceed in value at that chat time this closed the case for the defense and the arguments monday morning proceedings the argument this morning was opened by mr varian who briefly recapitulated the history of the cases he referred to the filing of the general genera on october ath 1888 against the three parcels of property embraced in this litigation and to the subsequent steps had the theory of the government he said was wao that these proceedings were had against the property and notice was haip given by taking poa possession session thereof as well as giving personal notice of the service of the monition to all persons known to claim an interest in such property either by deeds upon record or by putting the actual occupants in possession there was no rule at common law directing that the court should give notice of future proceedings in any special newspaper and his bis contention was that the seizure of this property by attachment was notice sufficient to the parties claiming an interest the returns of the officers oh showed w affirmatively that this property was seized and a copy of the monition filed and recorded in the recorders office a copy being served upon all persons claiming or in possession the single question to be determined here was whether this property was acquired in violation of the law of 1862 whether the late corporation of the church of jesus christ of latter day saints which had haa acquired it had already acquired and held real estate of the value of or exceeding in value 50 the law of 1862 prohibited any religious corporation or association from acquiring or holding real property t under these circumstances from IL the language of the act it we was quite apparent that congress contemplated tut that the violation of the law might be a continuing one in regard to the prohibition congress was striking at what chat was supposed to be a menace to the institutions of the country and the object was to limit this class of corporations of aggregate bodies from massing together real property in excess of a certain amount the property itself was not made the offender but the holding in certain hands of a surplus amount counsel quoted from the general statute of 1862 and instanced what he conceived eel ved to be the apparent object of the prohibitory provisions congress having in mind the act of limitation prohibiting hi any suit or prosecution to enforce any penalty or forfeiture inserted in 16 the prohibitory provision of 1862 the words or held making it clear that the intention was that this violation or of ferise was to be in the nature of a continuing one and that in the case of any religious corporation or association holding from day to day week to week and year to year within the prohibitory clause the government could at any time it thought proper enforce the prohibition what the united states wa was now seeking to escheat was the title the fee to the property in controversy the sole object of inquiry here was to ascertain |